Ship creation rules...

[tneva82]

although I am inclined to agree on the basis that you will just end up with far to many ship types, it will be a nightmare to keep track of, you will end up checking each others ships, their will be people who cheat and rely on people not to check, and it's just a big can of worms waiting to be oppened.

That's not the issue. Issue is that it simply can't produce balanced costs...

If it was that simple don't you think games would be balanced as they are long time ago? Develop point cost system, calculate each ship. Done!

Too bad those point cost calculators can't work...Reason comes from same reason which ensures 100% balanced game can't happen but if we let players to create their own ship problem gets magnified 100% fold.

Unless the point cost system is deliberatly OVERCOSTED so that each ship will end up ATLEAST one priority level higher than technicly they should be.

 

[H]

actually, that was my primary issue, man, you even look to argue against someone who agrees with you! 8)

 

[tneva82]

actually, that was my primary issue, man, you even look to argue against someone who agrees with you! 8)

The checking valid stats isn't primary problem with the ship creation rules...Just minor annoyance.

 

[H]

either way, the idea is bad, whatever we both list as our main concern. Vote no for ship design rules

for those people who want to design ships, design ships, and submit them to S+P, simple enough.

 

[Jhary]

I don't think it's a goods idea. The power gaming argument is a just one and iconic ships of the show have to compete as it is for a place on the team. It'll be awful, lot's of patrol level versions of raid level ships by reducing speed, hull and side weaponary.


Cheers
Mark

I can´t stand any more this power gaming Qoutes about a design sysem. right now if you want to see powergamers look at the centaurie beam teams.

 

[MarkNorfolk]

I don't think it's a goods idea. The power gaming argument is a just one and iconic ships of the show have to compete as it is for a place on the team. It'll be awful, lot's of patrol level versions of raid level ships by reducing speed, hull and side weaponary.


Cheers
Mark

I can´t stand any more this power gaming Qoutes about a design sysem. right now if you want to see powergamers look at the centaurie beam teams.

So are ISA the dominant force in tourneys?

My point is the ships you'll. Artillery ships with Move 1 and hull 4 (or maybe 3) and no side/rear weaponary. Minbari ships with one big beam gun and nothing else (except stealth 6 and maybe two turns). Nova variants with hull 6 and interceptor 4 (and no front or rear guns to bring back down to raid level). Dag'kars with speed 1 and twice as many EM launchers. And so on...

Cheers
Mark

 

[greenboy]

But that a problem with the system logic would say that faster ships should be better as they should be able to choose their fights but in game terms its any thing but speed is a dissadvantage with out enough turns the drazi really suffer from this especially from fleets with good all round fire at mid range

 

[Commador Q]

ship creation guidlines and point systems would be a good idea for the development team. it would streamline the testing and balancing preocess, as there'd be less of a tendance for the developer's and playtesters bias to affect the stats of a ship as the somwhat arbitrary "this doesn't seem like a raid level ship" or "my X doesn't really perform the way the fluff says it should" are just used to fine tune the designe rather than forming the basis for every aspect of the designe. this of coarse assumes a statistically valid ship creation system.

However, including ship building rules for the perpus of allowing players to designe their own ships in the main game is a bad idea. While i don't oppose creating your own ships for your own personall use, by no means should custum ships be torunament legal or supported by the printed rules. Simply put it's impossible to make rules that are good enough. Specialist ships always outperform generalist ships (ie any ship that makes sence from a fluff perspective), and any system that would allow the player to reproduce the existing ships would inevitably allow the sort of extreme "that ship couldn't really exist" ships that ruin the atmosphere of the game. For example: a ship with dodge interceptors GEG and stealth. it doesn't matter so much what it's hull, damage and crew values are and no one of it's defences has to be that hight because of the synergy. sure you could add rules that reduse the effectivness of layered defences, but that's just one example, and there are undoutedly many more.

 

[Calistan]

ship creation guidlines and point systems would be a good idea for the development team. it would streamline the testing and balancing preocess, as there'd be less of a tendance for the developer's and playtesters bias to affect the stats of a ship as the somwhat arbitrary "this doesn't seem like a raid level ship" or "my X doesn't really perform the way the fluff says it should" are just used to fine tune the designe rather than forming the basis for every aspect of the designe. this of coarse assumes a statistically valid ship creation system.

However, including ship building rules for the perpus of allowing players to designe their own ships in the main game is a bad idea. While i don't oppose creating your own ships for your own personall use, by no means should custum ships be torunament legal or supported by the printed rules. Simply put it's impossible to make rules that are good enough. Specialist ships always outperform generalist ships (ie any ship that makes sence from a fluff perspective), and any system that would allow the player to reproduce the existing ships would inevitably allow the sort of extreme "that ship couldn't really exist" ships that ruin the atmosphere of the game. For example: a ship with dodge interceptors GEG and stealth. it doesn't matter so much what it's hull, damage and crew values are and no one of it's defences has to be that hight because of the synergy. sure you could add rules that reduse the effectivness of layered defences, but that's just one example, and there are undoutedly many more.

Isn't that how ships are made. You have Super carriers, missile cruisers, trasports, frigates .... Ships have always been purpose built. Honestly, look at Battle Ships. A Battle Ship's main asset are its main guns, how can you expect any war game to be different.

 

[The Hobbybox]

I think the only way this could work would be to have a ship building list for each different race, mainly due to the fact that each race has different weapons available to it, and the racial specials (e.g. GEG) would have to be inbuilt against the cost of the weapons for that race. (Hope that makes sense :?: )

I'd certainly like to design my own ships, and a Battletech style system would probably work, but I suspect that a ship building system would take a huge amount of investment of time from Mongoose (and us playtesty types) to get it anywhere close to balanced.

 

[Jhary]

We have right now ships what are not allowed for Tournements. Waht speak against an Ship design system for friendly games only.

You can still send youre design to MG and maybe they take it and make it oficial

 

[Da Boss]

No reason why you can't do all that now - if all your freinds agreew ith a ship you make up play with it, send it to Mongoose. However I would doubt that any made up with a Points system would be allowed in Tournaments for reasons others have stated.

Incidently it is interesting that a points system already exisits in Campaigns where ships are assigned a rather bizare points value based on their prioiry.

have fun

 

[Commador Q]

ship creation guidlines and point systems would be a good idea for the development team. it would streamline the testing and balancing preocess, as there'd be less of a tendance for the developer's and playtesters bias to affect the stats of a ship as the somwhat arbitrary "this doesn't seem like a raid level ship" or "my X doesn't really perform the way the fluff says it should" are just used to fine tune the designe rather than forming the basis for every aspect of the designe. this of coarse assumes a statistically valid ship creation system.

However, including ship building rules for the perpus of allowing players to designe their own ships in the main game is a bad idea. While i don't oppose creating your own ships for your own personall use, by no means should custum ships be torunament legal or supported by the printed rules. Simply put it's impossible to make rules that are good enough. Specialist ships always outperform generalist ships (ie any ship that makes sence from a fluff perspective), and any system that would allow the player to reproduce the existing ships would inevitably allow the sort of extreme "that ship couldn't really exist" ships that ruin the atmosphere of the game. For example: a ship with dodge interceptors GEG and stealth. it doesn't matter so much what it's hull, damage and crew values are and no one of it's defences has to be that hight because of the synergy. sure you could add rules that reduse the effectivness of layered defences, but that's just one example, and there are undoutedly many more.

Isn't that how ships are made. You have Super carriers, missile cruisers, trasports, frigates .... Ships have always been purpose built. Honestly, look at Battle Ships. A Battle Ship's main asset are its main guns, how can you expect any war game to be different.

you aren't understandin the degree of specilisation vs generalisation i'm using in my argument. at some point a ship is so specialized that it doesn't make any sence. such as a ship with speed 1 and dodge. and unless you want to special case every possible combination of traits and equipment somone will eventually find a case that doesn't make much sence, but is technically allowable, and makes a more powerfull ship than was intended.